Sick and Wrong: How Health Care Reform is Screwed

[Lupino]

A fascinating read for anyone paying any attention to the debate going on. It's sad really how real change for the better is being sidetracked by "Socialism!" and "Death Panels!"

Rolling Stones (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29988909/sick_and_wrong)

[DemolitionSquid]

Most Americans don't even know what Socialism is. Its not evil.

[Xyvik]

Most Americans don't even know what Socialism is. Its not evil.

Even dictatorship is not inherently evil, It's the people behind the show that tend to make it so. The really funny part is that America has been inching towards Socialism since during Vietnam and the general populace can't seem to grasp that concept.

[Ghost_828]

An amusing clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUPMjC9mq5Y).

[DemolitionSquid]

America, land of the ignorant and the scared.

[Gradius]

Agreed: this new Obama plan sounds great. Logically, just because America's current healthcare system sucks, any other plan is automatically preferrable, irregardless of its details. After all, who has time to read 1000 pages? I already stay at home, eat potato chips & play video games all day while you suckers pay all my bills. Now I'll get free healthcare too! ;D

Obama - Change We Can Believe In!

PS: And since when has it not been a good idea to allow other people to manage your money? Something good always comes out of that, especially when government is involved. :3

[/sarcasm]

[Pandonetho]

I think we should just vote Blizzard into power.

Their mechanics are fundamentally solid and have proven to be so for the past 11 years.
Let's put that practice into a bigger picture.

Under Blizztatorship all supporters will get a license to become an official Blizzbot.
All innovators and naysayers will be boo'd for their crazy whacked out ideas that could prove to be unstable.

Blizztatorship will provide competitive incentives but the economy and system will be balanced. I think a Blizztatorship would be the best decision for the world now.

Healthcare? Under Blizztatorship there will be no problems! And you pay nothing! It will function under a system similar to (but better than) Sweden. You don't make any money, all your income goes to Blizz headquarters, and they issue a medic to your house and the only thing it will cost is the energy it takes to heal you!

Transportation? Under Blizzard we'll have vehicles that can accelerate to high speeds in less than 1 second, make 90 degree turns without decelerating, and crash into walls without the slightest scratch. Their specially patented inertia-less drives are the way of the future!

If you need to get to somewhere fast, we can always call up a dropship, they're much faster than modern transportation.

We'll ensure that any foreign threat is dealt with easily as Blizzard is a very militaristic government, but worry not, they care just as much for the citizens (Blizzbots) as they do the military. If you're a civilian you're guaranteed to be able to pilot anything (hey, if you can pilot a battlecruiser, anything less should be easy). However, there's a certain profiling test that you must take to determine whether you'll join the army or join the workers (where you will be issued a special construction vehicle).

I really don't think there's any flaw with a Blizztatorship.

[spychi]

Someone could explain it to me how the new healthcare will work?

[Gifted]

I think we should just vote Blizzard into power.

Their mechanics are fundamentally solid and have proven to be so for the past 11 years.
Let's put that practice into a bigger picture.

Under Blizztatorship all supporters will get a license to become an official Blizzbot.
All innovators and naysayers will be boo'd for their crazy whacked out ideas that could prove to be unstable.

Blizztatorship will provide competitive incentives but the economy and system will be balanced. I think a Blizztatorship would be the best decision for the world now.

Healthcare? Under Blizztatorship there will be no problems! And you pay nothing! It will function under a system similar to (but better than) Sweden. You don't make any money, all your income goes to Blizz headquarters, and they issue a medic to your house and the only thing it will cost is the energy it takes to heal you!

Transportation? Under Blizzard we'll have vehicles that can accelerate to high speeds in less than 1 second, make 90 degree turns without decelerating, and crash into walls without the slightest scratch. Their specially patented inertia-less drives are the way of the future!

If you need to get to somewhere fast, we can always call up a dropship, they're much faster than modern transportation.

We'll ensure that any foreign threat is dealt with easily as Blizzard is a very militaristic government, but worry not, they care just as much for the citizens (Blizzbots) as they do the military. If you're a civilian you're guaranteed to be able to pilot anything (hey, if you can pilot a battlecruiser, anything less should be easy). However, there's a certain profiling test that you must take to determine whether you'll join the army or join the workers (where you will be issued a special construction vehicle).

I really don't think there's any flaw with a Blizztatorship.
This post is win only due to the creation of the word "Blizztatorship"

[Visions of Khas]

I like the concept of america. I'm less charmed by its practice and execution.

Like healthcare. wtf. Screw you, Nancy Mccaughey. I know sadly little on the subject, but was listening to a republican-oriented radio station, and a canadian caller complained that her father was passed over for a liver transplant "simply because" his advanced cirhossis was caused by excessive drinking. And that's wrong... why? He F'ed himself, so he should suffer the consequences; there are plenty of younger, smarter, less self-abusive people out there more deserving of such a transplant. Boo-frickin-hoo, lady.

And the justice system. Seriously, a drunk guy can pee on a shrubbery and be labeled a sexual predator if seen by a kid some twenty yards off, and thenceforth that individual's life is screwed to say the least. A murderer can get off easier; at least they don't have to go around the block and proclaim, "I've murdered 'X' number of people." In such cases I support jury nullification in light of excessive punishments, like this and pot possession.

And I am so pissed at people proclaiming Obama's pushing a socialist agenda. News flash, people: we are not a purely capitalist system, we incorporate socialism. That's right, buddy, you've got socialist elements in ya! "Oh no, I must purge mine self of all sin!!1" And I read Obama's transcript addressing school students. Who the FUCK thought he was pushing socialism THERE!? (btw, big news: Hong Kong goes third way -- incorporating the distributive properties of socialism with the productive capacity of capitalism, and it has a thriving economy. Mmm, maybe pure capitalism isn't the best afterall? (Granted, its economoc prosperity is due greatly to trade. Some one correct me if I'm wrong on the Third Way, please; I'm a neophyte when it comes to economics...)

Blizztatorship. NOW.

... /rant

[Xyvik]

Agreed: this new Obama plan sounds great. Logically, just because America's current healthcare system sucks, any other plan is automatically preferrable, irregardless of its details. After all, who has time to read 1000 pages? I already stay at home, eat potato chips & play video games all day while you suckers pay all my bills. Now I'll get free healthcare too! ;D

Obama - Change We Can Believe In!

PS: And since when has it not been a good idea to allow other people to manage your money? Something good always comes out of that, especially when government is involved. :3

[/sarcasm]

What people with this same opinion fail to realize is that the system being proposed works just fine in lots of other countries. It's just Americans who fail to realize that hey, sometimes it's better if somebody else manages something for you.

Regardless of how great or bad the idea is, it really isn't up to the President OR the people...it's up to the fools in congress and the senate, and lord knows they couldn't care less.

And Pandonethe...that was a brilliant post. You forgot one thing though...due to Blizztatorship time schedules you must wait 3 years before any health problem is properly diagnosed, and another 3 years before they do anything about it.

[Kacaier]

What people with this same opinion fail to realize is that the system being proposed works just fine in lots of other countries. It's just Americans who fail to realize that hey, sometimes it's better if somebody else manages something for you.
While I agree some sort of beneficial reform is necessitated, using some other country's system merely because it works fine for them isn't a convincing argument. The United States is nothing like Europe, besides being developed, industrialized, and wealthy. The differences, however, is culture (and being 10x wealthier ;)). And that alone is something that should be critically calculated in these plans.

Whether it may or may not be from national healthcare or the overexcessive socialization, Europe is in a fumble right now. The lack of natural population growth along with the lessening of workers/tax generators, means there aren't a lot of taxes to go around for the growing population of old people. There's that problem even with the Untied States on Social Security.

No one fails to realize anything yet until we get somewhere in several decades to see if the system actually works. However, because people still are dying, I think the most we should go for is health insurance reform or along those lines, without going the way of Europe. And yes, I didn't mention Canada. That's because I don't like Demo. :D

[DemolitionSquid]

While I agree some sort of beneficial reform is necessitated, using some other country's system merely because it works fine for them isn't a convincing argument. The United States is nothing like Europe, besides being developed, industrialized, and wealthy. The differences, however, is culture (and being 10x wealthier ;)). And that alone is something that should be critically calculated in these plans.

Whether it may or may not be from national healthcare or the overexcessive socialization, Europe is in a fumble right now. The lack of natural population growth along with the lessening of workers/tax generators, means there aren't a lot of taxes to go around for the growing population of old people. There's that problem even with the Untied States on Social Security.

No one fails to realize anything yet until we get somewhere in several decades to see if the system actually works. However, because people still are dying, I think the most we should go for is health insurance reform or along those lines, without going the way of Europe. And yes, I didn't mention Canada. That's because I don't like Demo. :D

Jealousy is not a good color on you. I suggest a flamboyant pink.

[Hammy]

Here's an interesting movie that give a point of view concerning Obama's presidency:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw
I'd rather not write an essay on the documentary itself and let you see for yourselves, but I'll say I can agree with a couple of things though.
Just please keep this in mind while watching this movie: some of the stuff said has some very strong basis that you can find yourself, and some other stuff looks more like speculation. If, like me, you enjoy analyzing movies, take a look at the rythm the ideas are presented in, and be sure to think about the relation between the facts and the conclusions.

Edit: Sorry forgot to mention the title of the movie: Obama's Deception
It's on youtube legally, and the producers actually encourage people to spread the word (and the documentary).

[Pandonetho]

Jealousy is not a good color on you. I suggest a flamboyant pink.

This ain't a Blizzmocracy, keep your opinions to yourself.

[spychi]

I don't trust google on this, soo please someone explain it to me how the US healthcare will work?

[Lupino]

The differences, however, is culture (and being 10x wealthier ;)). And that alone is something that should be critically calculated in these plans.
Then something is bloody wrong with a culture that would rather its own people die than give up the adequate resources to fix the problem. Especially when the solution can be done for cheaper than the current system. But the sheeple listening to the talking heads would rather bitch about the "guv'ment" getting in their business as they go to cash that Medicare check, defend the very industry that got us in this mess so that they can continue making profits based on denying life to others, or hiding behind the idea of American Exceptionalism instead of learning from others about how to fix the problem.

[sandwich_bird]

An amusing clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUPMjC9mq5Y).HAHAHAHAhAHH omg. Wow, just wow. I demand that the right to vote is given only to educated individuals that have proven they understand the issues at stake. We have the same problems here in Canada with separatist parties in Quebec using the guillibity of voters to feed them lies about the federal government.

[Visions of Khas]

That clip isn't so amusing as it is disgusting and frightening. =[

[Santrega]

Read some of this for factual information on the healthcare bill...

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/twenty-six-lies-about-hr-3200/

If you search for healthcare on the site you'll see at least 20 different articles they were forced to write due to new misinformation being spread.

I've noticed most of you have actually fallen into the trap of listening and believing that misinformation.

[dustinbrowder]

Current US health care system - FAIL
New health care system - less fail

Its only better because the current one sucks. With billions of dollars going from your budget to wars, wars, wars, weapons, weapons, weapons, military, military, military, you only need to stop the military spending or decrease it and only invest 5% of your budget to have great health care.

And no socialism is not evil, bad, wrong, hell. It actually worked pretty well in Yugoslavia and can work great elsewhere if there is a responsible and uncompromisable leader.

But yeah, US citizens need to focus more on learning history, politics and generally more learning to comprehend what changes means what to you.

[Nenol-phoenix]

from:
- -09-27-2009, 08:01 PM #19- -
to:
- -07-12-2010, 05:33 PM #20- -
'nuff said
ALL HAIL THREAD NECROMANCY! :D
that's awesome, nearly 10 frickin months

[TheRabidDeer]

from:
- -09-27-2009, 08:01 PM #19- -
to:
- -07-12-2010, 05:33 PM #20- -
'nuff said
ALL HAIL THREAD NECROMANCY! :D
that's awesome, nearly 10 frickin months

If it is on topic, thread necromancy isnt always bad. Do you think he shouldve made a new thread for that post?


With billions of dollars going from your budget to wars, wars, wars, weapons, weapons, weapons, military, military, military, you only need to stop the military spending or decrease it and only invest 5% of your budget to have great health care.


Why do people say things like this? Do some research.
http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/visualizations/2009-united-states-budget
Nearly 17% is defense related (I am unsure of how much more is military related)
21% is for medical (already 4 times as much as you say we need to invest to have great health care!)

What should really be done, is something to handle the abomination that is social security. Nearly 20% of our budget goes towards it? What a waste!

[dustinbrowder]

If it is on topic, thread necromancy isnt always bad. Do you think he shouldve made a new thread for that post?



Why do people say things like this? Do some research.
http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/visualizations/2009-united-states-budget
Nearly 17% is defense related (I am unsure of how much more is military related)
21% is for medical (already 4 times as much as you say we need to invest to have great health care!)

What should really be done, is something to handle the abomination that is social security. Nearly 20% of our budget goes towards it? What a waste!

No, if 17% are billions and billions of dollars, even closer to trillions of dollars for killing people and you cut it to 1% than the budget increases by trillions of dollars and 5% is now a lot more.

Basic mathematical calculation.

And throwing money at the problem isn't the solution, as I've stated properly in my post, how this new plan is just a little bit less fail than the previous one.

once again you show how you fail to see through the numbers and probably didn't even read the new plan.

[sandwich_bird]

If it is on topic, thread necromancy isnt always bad. Do you think he shouldve made a new thread for that post?


I'll let it pass but I would have preferred a new thread.

Carry on!

[TheRabidDeer]

No, if 17% are billions and billions of dollars, even closer to trillions of dollars for killing people and you cut it to 1% than the budget increases by trillions of dollars and 5% is now a lot more.

Basic mathematical calculation.

And throwing money at the problem isn't the solution, as I've stated properly in my post, how this new plan is just a little bit less fail than the previous one.

once again you show how you fail to see through the numbers and probably didn't even read the new plan.

You said to invest 5% of our budget, if you cut that 17% on the military and give it all to medical, then it simply increases from 21% to 38% of the total budget. The only way to make it a smaller % is to cut how much you spend on that particular thing or to increase the size of the budget. If we cut military spending and dont spend it on anything else then the country starts to "save" money, which is useless. The point of a budget it to appropriate the funds that you do have and spend it wisely (while not going over and entering a deficit).

So, I think you are slightly off in your thinking here.

[//MavericK\\]

While I do not have enough understanding of the bill(no one really does I don't think) to accurately provide my own insight... I will say that right now the system we have doesn't work all that great...but I'm not sure anything would be better than what we have now.

I will leave you with this hilarious clip. While taken somewhat out of context, it has been used by the Conservative block to great effect and pretty darn funny regardless.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hV-05TLiiLU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hV-05TLiiLU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[Santrega]

I Apologize for the thread necromancy. I'm not sure what happened exactly. I believe I saw it on page 1, because I didn't go to any other page. However, I can't say its not possible I clicked a page by accident and didn't notice the page change, then clicked on this thread thinking it was a current discussion.

I really did think it was a current discussion, which is why i didn't notice the post directly before mine was back in September.

Sorry again :/

[dustinbrowder]

You said to invest 5% of our budget, if you cut that 17% on the military and give it all to medical, then it simply increases from 21% to 38% of the total budget. The only way to make it a smaller % is to cut how much you spend on that particular thing or to increase the size of the budget. If we cut military spending and dont spend it on anything else then the country starts to "save" money, which is useless. The point of a budget it to appropriate the funds that you do have and spend it wisely (while not going over and entering a deficit).

So, I think you are slightly off in your thinking here.

Considering how I said throwing money won't solve the problem the best way is hardly to increase medical to 50%.
Instead add the money from military to the budget and reorganize it.
if you had 800 million previously, you now gain say 100 million from the cut military expenses and you re-calculate the budget.
So 5% of 900 millions is more than 5% of 800 millions.

[TheRabidDeer]

Considering how I said throwing money won't solve the problem the best way is hardly to increase medical to 50%.
Instead add the money from military to the budget and reorganize it.
if you had 800 million previously, you now gain say 100 million from the cut military expenses and you re-calculate the budget.
So 5% of 900 millions is more than 5% of 800 millions.
If you reorganize the money that you are spending, then medical is still using at least 21% of the budget, which is way over what you estimated earlier ("only invest 5% of your budget to have great health care"). My argument is just that you didnt do research and simply didnt realize that under the old system we are already spending an enormous amount of money on medical (on the order of 710 billion dollars). Changing the budget and cutting the US military down to nothing and removing any power that the US might have in the world doesnt solve anything.

[Quirel]

Meh.
I'm sick and tired of debating this with both sides of the spectrum. Simply put, I KNOW that American health care needs reform, but I'd also like to point out that AMERICA IS DIFFERENT FROM EUROPE! It's an inconvenient truth, I know, but as American Social Security and Medicare proved, our government has a huge problem with running long-term programs without going over budget and becoming ineffective.

I hate the misinformation that's been spread around, but I believe that if they were really serious about health care reform, they'd remove barriers to insurance companies competing across the nation (Competition's good for you) and cap rewards on malpractice lawsuits.

[Lupino]

Thread necromancy indeed, if only we had buried the Necronomicon when we had the chance. Klatu verada nic*cough*! :D

And Quirel, things like malpractice make up a very, very small portion of the overall costs of healthcare in America. Something like 2-3%. The only reason Republicans keep bringing it up is because they've connected trial lawyers to Democrats, and anything done to defeat the enemy takes precedent over anything done to fix the nation.

Anyways, now that the law was finally passed, I'm still disappointed that it didn't do enough, but at least it's law and it's something to work out from.

[Quirel]

And Quirel, things like malpractice make up a very, very small portion of the overall costs of healthcare in America. Something like 2-3%. The only reason Republicans keep bringing it up is because they've connected trial lawyers to Democrats, and anything done to defeat the enemy takes precedent over anything done to fix the nation.
How about the cost of malpractice insurance and the extra tests doctors have to run to make sure that they can't get sued.

Seriously, even if the cost is less than 5%, America needs some serious tort reform.

[Lupino]

You can read more here (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=az9qxQZNmf0o), but as the article itself puts it, the argument is a red herring. 2% of medical costs in America is directly linked to medical malpractice, while said defensive medicine accounts for only an additional 5-9% of costs indirectly linked.

Serious tort reform would be good in and of itself, but unlike what the Republicans claimed, simply focusing on that and "greater competition" wouldn't amount to more than a drop in the bucket.